Since it's a hot topic on the other forum...

Just curious, what was the thought process on giving thieves the rest of their points/path all before hero - at a range where thieves can absolutely dominate the mind 30s range. There's almost no fear for a thief at level 42, they're one of the hardest classes to fight if they really don't want to... and yet they get all their path points before the hero range. Why? Don't we want them to rank to hero like everyone else?

There's a lot of classes that have this problem (where the 40-50 range is void of any real improvements or power levels like assassinations at level 35) but thieves especially were written this way to receive all 18 points at level 42 and nothing to hero.

Just wondering the reasoning - seems pretty silly.

By your logic final shapeshifter forms, warrior legacies, ranger's snare, druid's hunt, AP's unholy bless, ect should all be granted at level 51.

Thief points are fine, they are not a powerhouse like you think. If it was, there would be a bunch of Torak thieves that make people cry. There's not.

Aps still get unholy bless at 36 but controls were moved from 36 to encourage aps to get into hero range.

I'll echo the masses and say that I don't see a problem here, nor do I think spreading those last 18 points over 42-51 is going to change the behavior or significantly alter the power level of a person whose primary objective is to fair weather PK or something like that.

There are many builds that "shine" at certain levels and can make life difficult for their opponents, however that's not something we're concerned about¹ at a high level and certainly not a game of whack-a-mole we're interested in engaging in.

As far as your question on rationale goes, I'm afraid I can't help. I wasn't around for the implementation of Neo Thieves.

1: We make adjustments where we feel there's a genuine balance concern, but I'm not convinced this is one of those times.

1) I've never ran into the character in question. Maybe on Behmurra/Ptolo but I remember just beating his face and him walking away.
2) I've ran into 42 thieves before and honestly it's annoyance and that's really it. As a guy who played a lot of APs, you generally just logout or play avoidance because the gain is never worth the risk of losing your weapon to things like sleepingdisarm, massive damage like the log Aberntye provided, cutoff/cheap shot, etc. You can't always be prepared and thieves are generally worth low amounts of charges. Now if there is some powerhouse thief (like that one binder Nexun), it can be worth it... but a smart thief just picks when they want to fight anyways. Again, generally not worth the risk. They cause a certain behavior of play - especially thugs/zerker.
3) I am going to echo others and myself again - I'm wondering why the point was made to give them every class ability at level 42. That's really the root of this, I'm not so big on the power difference. There's not much reason to hero unless you want the significant challenge... and the problem of level sitters who prey at their highest potential never really changes. The examples some have listed like edge points, DV, etc are really not worth having folks like the current emperor in your range who can probably 2-round you and see you... or Lilyth, Liantae, etc etc. Thieves generally have a rough time (not always). Maybe DV was more of an incentive but with how hard it can be to get edges in general now, not so much something you can bet on getting twice.
4) There is a reason final forms for shifters come later... why legacies are 44/47, why healer rejuv was moved up, etc. Lots of things were put in place at higher ranks to encourage people to level. Imagine the game where both legacies, enhanced reactions, etc came at level 42 - you don't think you wouldn't see Greeting/Cry humans just beating face of people level 33? Do you remember the days of APs having controls at 36? Every class should have a stronger incentive to level. You're giving a 42 thief 18 points - the equivalent of 9 levels of points for... what? Does someone actually think a 42 thief needs more power at that level?

Anyways, don't answer if you feel like just repeating the same. I just felt that I wasn't trying to engage the hate train on Heaghul - it was specific to class design and why one class, gets everything 9 levels before hero and zero skills/incentives to go to hero.

Why 42 thief is encouraged?

I ask you...

Why not?

Your only reason for change seems to be that you are annoyed by a particular tactic. Well, I'm annoyed when your AP sleeps me and when you try to kill me for power gains. I'd rather not have to deal with that just as you'd rather not have to deal with level sitting thieves. I don't see anymore validity to your annoying tactic than level 42 thief's level sitting.

I think there are too many subjective, biased assumptions you have to make about the "nature," "design," and "intended balance" of the game to agree with many arguments you make about the game.

You say "There is a reason final forms for shifters come later..."

I would like to hear what you would say that reason is, and maybe why you think that if you care to expand.

If a thief is killing a lot and not dying then they are worth significant charges.

The thief that probably prompted this thread almost certainly is.

Having said that, I do support incentivising all builds to get into hero range.

Opportunistic killers in the mid ranks do kill people but it's very few in number usually. This is especially true nowadays where they is nowhere the amount of people of old. Even that nexun binder who was pretty deathful was like 4 charges maybe? Was it worth risking being sleepingdisarmed and looted? Hell no.

Lots of charges come from people that are killers who are not opportunistic. Druids who wreck everything that moves or Daev's and a few other players have characters worth a lot... and it's usually a fight. Thieves don't give people a fight, so most people don't stick around or play their game. I've found that most people that kill a lot of players actually have something where the other player gets more invested. If it starts out with an UNSPEAK backstab, you gtfo. This is part of the reason why STSF is so inherently strong - people like to fight.

Villagers ironically are hardly ever worth the gamble because they die a lot and kill a lot. You can be incredibly deathful, throw out random ANNIHILATEs in the 30-40s, and be worth 1 charge. I learned over several APs that they really are not worth the hassle. Thieves are similar.

The game isn't only about hero range. Thieves are very squishy, except for a healer I think every class can engineer fights that favor them at almost every level range.

I would be behind just giving thieves 10 more thief points at 51, especially with the edge point changes.

I think a higher level challenge these days is low numbers make ranges more hit or miss, especially for players that either log long sessions or generally don't play evenings.

Some sort of systemic change to have fewer but fuller ranges would be cool but I can't see how to accomplish that without being a massive change to game mechanics. We as players don't tend to handle those kind of changes gracefully.

I don't know about giving them more points, because there are a few builds I can imagine that need just a few more points to combine methods of command denial. This boils down to some combination of cheap shot, parting block, bind legs, neuro toxin and abrasive powder. A few more points allow these to be combined and that would be a balance issue.

But, there are a buttload of not-so-PK-deadly skills. Things like glimpse, climb, counterfeit, bribe mercenary, gentle walk, the whole locksmith path. It might be nice to have them, but there is an opportunity cost. And there are other skills have some PK utility but aren't really deadly. When I come up with my buids I try to get as close as possible to two full paths, when 2xdevious is added, and that doesn't leave any room for the general path or the non-PK abilities.

I'd really like to see thieves getting a lot more skills but keep them away from command denial stacking.

There are scissors to their paper bud. Heaghul left me alone as Raeth for a simple reason: I'd flat out kill him.

Ranger catches a thief - dead thief
duergar flail/axe - dead thief
duergar shaman - dead thief
competent assassin - dead thief
I'd also wager high HP builds have little trouble with them too

Sure, thieves are opportunistic....this is by DESIGN. If a thief keeps catching you with you pants down it just means they are 'thiefing' right. Get better at avoiding them, I mean hell, you can flat out go MANY places they cannot hide - and I'd wager not be bothered.

I really don't understand this gripe at all.

Seems very conducive to increasing activity and promoting interaction. And one again "just don't fight ever" is not an argument that something is balanced, especially a hiding class.

So 4 builds can dominate a 42 thief. Awesome.

This is also not an argument about the question at hand, that is, why they get everything at 42 and have zero incentive to hit hero.

Anyway to reiterate I have had zero interaction or fights with the character that inspired this, but I fully understand the issue, as everyone has had to deal with sad midbie thug berserkers acting as the serial reapers of the meek that they are, and thus I have little respect for them, because, as you say, they don't really have the skillset to beat anything stronger, so they just ruin the days of those who cannot deal with them.

Didn't rejuvenate move from level 41 to level 43 to avoid healers sitting out of hero range?

I think stretching thief point accumulation out to level 43 and beyond would be a good thing.

I can theorycraft many builds that are going to dominate a thug thief at various levels.

As far as incentive to hit hero goes I could be wrong but:

1)I'm pretty sure you need hero to take devious versatility
2)you get a boatload of edge points at hero
3)in the case of thief in question, he also gets a boatload of edge pts at 49 for being under 100xp penalty
4) lvl 51 bracket is indeed a pk bracket with its own rewards for 5/10/15 PK's
5) with the recent changes to parry/etc in regards to wpn lvl vs player lvl ranking to 51 presents better options here

There are a bunch of incentives to rank up as a thief. Honestly, if they were going to "Spread out" the thief points more, they should make it so you get enough for 2 full paths at 51. Make a hero thief something to be feared as much as a lvl 42 thief.

I simply look at rangers/thieves as the masters of their terrain forest/city. You should never look to engage one on its home turf.

nt

Food for thought: Devious versatility is a very big deal. 10 thief points is an additional 10% total thief points, and easily 2-3 skills from any thief tree.

From Flaaayin's PBF:

Total PK Wins 156 (141 at level 51)

Thieves are PK capable at hero with the right edges/etc. I can think of other classes that can sit at/near 42 and absolutely destroy/terrorize the majority of their range.

Orc - bully + 100xp penalty is big
Ranger - (ambush build or perma lag build)
Assassin - Jycenna anyone?
Transmuter - Theorycrafting that I could beat some serious ass with a 0 xp penalty muter @ 42. Use of limited preps required
Human warrior - Axe/mace RBW would profit @ 42


Really, all it boils down to is the benefit of having a low xp penalty. I feel that you can dominate as low xp penalty lvl 42 with a variety of builds that aren't shifter ;)

Thug thieves are one of those builds that can be made to look very good. It definitely has some strong levels in the mid twenties, but to me it mostly isn't a concern at forty-two.

If you can't think of more than the four builds they listed that would give a thief issues, I would suggest that you try one out. I have played a few thugs, and I often walked around finding people that I was pretty sure if I attacked them they would kill me. For a few examples, anyone that uses polearm, axes, or is giant sized and could bash is a chancy battle at best for a thief (Acrobatics being the exception here).

As far as the points at level 42, the game doesn't start at hero though there are incentives for everyone to reach it. There is even a seasonal race that can't reach hero, that kind of says more than anything else I could say.

I find midranks pk way more fun than hero, as the fights are much tighter and with way less margin of error, so I am most certainly not one to fault anyone for level sitting.

That said, what you describe is exactly the problem. It is bad against many (most?) builds, and certainly anyone prepared, but they specifically excel at reaping the meek. Non pk players, mages, injured people, etc. They also excel at making it impossible to get anything done pk wise if you can expect them to be waiting to step in and interfere with the fight, making it easier to just not.

I cannot see how that is fun for anyone involved, since engineering a scenario for those with the strength to ruin them is difficult with any measure of conservative play.

To clarify, I simply feel they need incentive to reach hero, not completely cap out at 42. If lvl 42 0 exp penalty was in range of 0 exp heroes, I would be totally fine with it.

Thieves are not that hard to stop. Go to someplace they can't hide (desert, water, wilderness in general), wait for them to come after you, bash... They excel at taking down the low hanging fruit just as much as necros/invokers/transmuters do with invis at low levels (just one example). They still have to be able to kill you, and that isn't something that is guaranteed for either combination. I have seen a few VERY good thug thieves, but I don't believe it was because thug thief is so strong as much as the players were that good.

... going somewhere he can't hide and wait? What sane thief is going to walk into that spot when there's an axe warrior waiting for them? One of the first lessons you learn is to *not* walk into rooms with folks... that's like saying a necromancer strategy is to wait and spam sleep. Sure it works on the bad but most prepared people have a very easy strategy against it - don't do it. It gets really boring just hanging out on the ocean waiting for stalking assassins to go away for example - and if ya don't want to be assassinated, your playstyle is very limited for example.

All the low hanging fruit killers you mentioned (necro, invoker, transmuter, etc) all have reason to hero. Almost every class does. Thieves don't. That's really the point of this.

Can only be taken at Hero IIRC. And +10 thief points is huge.

Also, any human thief would hit this "boatload" of edge points, these things combined are substantial

Characters receive edgepoints upon hitting the following milestones:
- Reaching hero (level 51).
- Reaching old age.
- Reaching level 49 with an xp penalty of 100 or less.
- Reaching level 49 with an xp penalty of 300 or less.


They have the same motivations as everyone else to hero.

Did not have points for devious versatility.

Granted, I had virtually no explore/observe and all I did was power rank to hero, but all those things combined was not enough for devious.

I don't know what the reqs are for it, but I assume it is just edge points?

Doesn't invalidate your point, but it does say devious ain't easy to get.

I vaguely remember Daev 'confirming' that IMM Exp was needed for Devious Versatility. I also remember it being called "one of, if not the most expensive edge"

Might need to rethink my Matrik stance.

Not sure what I did as Colfen to make you like the character, but thanks for noticing little ol' Matrik I suppose :P